A new study has found that the resulting air pollution reduction from net zero policies could spur a gain of between $65 billion and $128 billion in healthcare in 2035 alone in the United States.
Air pollution has long been found to have adverse effects on human health. In the contiguous United States, air pollution is estimated to cause between 5% and 10% of premature mortality each year. Figures that are only getting worse as emissions increase.
According to Dr. Alex Barron, an author of the study and professor at Smith College in Massachusetts, “a decarbonised society means cleaner air…how many clean air benefits we realise and who benefits will depend on how policymakers shape this transition.”
The transition depends largely on what fuel sources the world begins to rely on. Some sources of energy, such as wind and solar, could accelerate the reduction of air pollution. Others, like biofuels, could release new emissions, even if they reduce our use of fossil fuels and gas.
Other sources of fuel and power can be much more successful in decarbonizing and reducing air pollutants. As explained by Dr. Dan Loughlin, scientist at the US Environmental Protection Agency and study author: “The modelling results were consistent: decarbonisation reduces co-emitted air pollutants and is expected to result in significant health benefits over the long term. Electrification combined with wind and solar tend to drive greater air pollutant emission co-reductions than many other decarbonisation pathways.”
Even using fossil gas or biomass would, for example, decrease any improvements in reducing air pollution compared to current coal use. The burning of these fuels, coupled with the clearing of land for bioenergy crops and increased fertilizer use, only leads to more pollution.
Loughlin clarifies that, despite the perception of bioenergy sources as more climate-friendly, they can lead to additional emissions. “Our analysis provides a peek into this response, suggesting that greater ammonia emissions occur in scenarios with greater use of biomass,” explains Loughlin.
The good news is that positive benefits from policies that reduce air pollution could happen very quickly. Drew Shindell, a climate scientist at Duke University, explained in 2021 how “air pollution responds quickly, as we saw with noticeably cleaner air after just a few months of reduced emissions during COVID lockdowns.”
Shindell heavily advocates for clean air policy as a priority for human health, stating that cleaner air “outweighs the costs of a transition towards a completely net zero carbon economy, even in the very first decade.”
Related Articles: Air Pollution in Europe: Exposure Kills 1,200 Children Every Year | The Invisible Killer Lurking in the Air of Our Cities | How Polluted Is the Air in Europe?
The study also expressed uncertainty about current technologies to capture and store carbon emitted into the atmosphere. Even if they could offset some air pollution if deployed at large scales, they themselves have the potential to create net emissions depending on how they are fueled.
Still, US policies for net zero by 2050 are expected to catalyze rapid gains in health among the population. The study finds that by 2035, early deaths from air pollution could drop by between 4,000 and 15,000 deaths a year. Right now, premature deaths related to air pollution are estimated to be between 90,000 and 360,000 in the United States alone, according to one study.
The financial gain from fewer negative health outcomes and early deaths, estimated to be between $65 billion and $128 billion, is at least as large as the gain from avoiding extreme climate events such as hurricanes and floods.
The benefits may be greater yet, according to the authors of the study. Seeing as the full impacts of air pollutants on human health are not fully known, it is hard to predict just how beneficial these climate action policies could be.
“It is really important to note that we are learning new things every day about the ways in which air pollution impacts our mind and our bodies,” adds Dr. Barron. “It won’t surprise me if the benefits are greater in retrospect than they appear in advance. People really value cleaner air as a near-term benefit of climate action, but the models we use to analyse climate policies don’t always make that part of the story clear to decision makers and the public.”
Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed here by the authors are their own, not those of Impakter.com — Cover Photo Credit: Ahmer Kalam.
